
3 major fights on the right to watch in Trump's next 6 months
Disputes on the right that had been simmering on the backburner as Republicans rallied around President Trump during his first six months in office are poised to roar to a boil in the second half of the year.
Now that Republicans have pushed through the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' of Trump's tax cut and spending priorities, there is more space to hash out other intra-party debates. Trump's approval ratings seem to be reaching a summer slump, creating an opening for criticism. And the fissure over Jeffrey Epstein disclosures has exposed a slip in Trump's grip on the GOP.
Here's what I'm watching:
1. Tariff hikes versus free trade instincts
Republicans are bracing for Trump's threatened tariff hikes on most countries — which he had paused for several months — ahead of another critical deadline on August 1.
Many Republicans have sat back and given Trump, who they regularly laud as a master negotiator, room to strike deals with trading partners. But Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on CBS News's 'Face the Nation' over the weekend that the Aug. 1 deadline is firm.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) recently told The Hill that the global and American economies are in a 'fragile spot right now' given the uncertainty over tariffs.
'We're in uncharted territory. I do not know the impact the tariffs are going to have on the American economy or the global economy. I don't, and nobody else does either,' Kennedy said.
Republicans have already started to voice some concerns about the looming tariffs amid a lack of international deals.
For instance, two dozen Republicans led by Rep. Ron Estes (R-Kansas) sent a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer last month asking the U.S. to maintain its zero tariff policy on civil aircraft, as Politico reported.
If the tariffs get more real with little in terms of deals, quiet concerns are likely to grow much louder.
2. Posture toward Russia and Ukraine
The president's patience with Vladimir Putin is wearing visibly thin as the Russian president resists any deal that would bring an end to his country's invasion of Ukraine — resulting in Trump growing more open to taking a tougher stance toward Russia.
Trump warned on July 14 that if Russia did not agree to a deal within 50 days, he would pursue 'very severe tariffs' on Russia — and Republicans in support of a bipartisan Russia sanctions bill have said that a vote on the matter will come as soon as Trump gives the green light.
But there is a notable contingent of Republicans who are still skeptical of being involved at all in the Russia-Ukraine clash. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) criticized Trump's plan to speed up weapons deliveries to NATO countries that would then send those arms to Ukraine in a New York Times interview last week.
'I said it on every rally stage: 'No more money to Ukraine. We want peace,'' Greene said.
And seventy-six House Republicans voted in favor of an amendment from Greene last week to bar funds in their annual defense appropriations bill from being used for assistance to Ukraine. Even though the amendment failed and less than a majority of the House GOP supported it, it's still a sizable chunk that could complicate any Trump efforts to support Kyiv.
3. Government funding clashes
It took some major pushes from Trump to get congressional Republicans all on board with his 'One Big Beautiful Bill' due in part to concerns from deficit hawks — and those disputes and dynamics are only going to get more complicated as Congress starts to address regular government funding ahead of the Sept. 30 funding deadline.
Shutdown fears are already growing, my colleague Alex Bolton reports, since Republicans will need cooperation from Democrats in the Senate to keep the government — which is still operating at levels first approved under former President Biden — open.
It typically takes a more moderate deal on appropriations to clear the Senate's 60-vote threshold. And this time, Democrats furious about the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' and package that clawed back funds already allocated to public broadcasting and foreign aid are eyeing taking a more aggressive stance.
Further complicating that is government funding furor from deficit hawks on the GOP side who were disappointed by the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' not doing more to cut spending.
But with little work done on regular government funding bills ahead of the August recess, a stopgap measure is looking more and more likely — a proposal that will infuriate deficit hawks.
Welcome to The Movement, a weekly newsletter looking at the influences and debates on the right in Washington. I'm Emily Brooks, House leadership reporter at The Hill. Tell me what's on your radar: ebrooks@thehill.com. Follow me on X: @emilybrooksnews.
Not already on the list? Subscribe here
THE LEGACY OF ED FEULNER
Heritage Foundation founder Edward Feulner died this weekend at 83 years old — leaving behind a legacy of shaping influential institutions in the conservative movement as much as anyone from the Reagan era to the Trump era.
It wasn't just Heritage that had Feulner's fingerprints. He played a role in founding and was executive director of the Republican Study Committee, the largest conservative caucus in the House. He was involved in a number of other organizations that still thrive and shape conservative politics and policy today.
Former Vice President Mike Pence wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Feulner encouraged him to lead the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, as part of an effort to support state-based conservative think tanks that would eventually turn into the State Policy Network.
Current Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts and Board of Trustees Chairman Barb Van Andel-Gaby talked about Feulner's movement-building approach in a statement: 'Whether he was bringing together the various corners of the conservative movement at meetings of the Philadelphia Society, or launching what is now the Heritage Strategy Forum, Ed championed a bold, 'big-tent conservatism.' He believed in addition, not subtraction. Unity, not uniformity.'
Without a doubt, Feulner was a giant of the conservative movement — and one of its most important builders.
'The young Republicans in Washington may not know it, but they are spending down the intellectual capital stockpiled by Ed Feulner and his generation,' the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board wrote.
WAVE OF FILE DROPS — BUT NOT THOSE ONES
Could it be that the conservative clamor to release more disclosures on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is dying down after releases from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on other, unrelated sagas that have defined the MAGA hunger for retribution?
Gabbard's ODNI on Friday published a press release saying there was 'overwhelming evidence' that former President Obama and his officials 'manufactured and politicized intelligence' to launch a 'years-long coup against President Trump' in relation to Trump's suspected ties to Russia. (More in NPR.)
That coincided with a narrative shift from the types of MAGA influencers who had centered on anger over lack of Epstein disclosures for weeks. Now, they're calling to arrest Obama administration officials — and even the former president himself.
But that wasn't all.
Attorney General Pam Bondi on Monday released more information on the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).Grassley subsequently released the 'Clinton Annex' appendix to the Justice Department inspector general report on the Clinton investigation.
'I appreciate their ongoing commitment to transparency and strongly urge them to continue to fully review this matter, including its national security impact,' Grassley said in a statement.
And for good measure, in a coordinated effort across agencies, the Trump administration released a tranche of files on the civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. — despite objections from his family.
Is it enough to calm the right-wing outrage about lack of transparency in the Epstein matter? Stay tuned — and maybe look to the House floor for any residual Epstein drama. While Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has said he has no plans to bring a vote a on a non-binding resolution in support of the Epstein files release before August recess, House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) told my colleague Mychael Schnell of an Epstein vote: 'It's still a long way to go until recess… I think one's gonna happen before August recess.'
ON MY CALENDAR
Wednesday, July 23: CPAC's Center for Combating Human Trafficking hosts an International Summit Against Human Trafficking on Capitol Hill in Cannon House Office Building, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Attorney General Pam Bondi is a confirmed speaker.
Wednesday, July 23: FDA Commissioner Marty Makary speaks for a lecture hosted by The Fund For American Studies and the office of Sen. Rand Paul, 12:30 p.m., Hart Senate Office Building.
Thursday, July 24: Libertarianism vs. Conservatism intern debate, a tradition with interns from the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation. 5:30 p.m., in person and live streamed.
Monday, July 28: Unleash Prosperity hosts a conversation with Stephen Moore and Virginia Gov. Glenn Younkin (R) for an event launching a 'Vote with your feet' website tracking movement of people and money across the states. 5-7 p.m. at the Capitol Hill Club.
THREE MORE THINGS
Ruthless, the GOP operative podcast hosted by Josh Holmes, Michael Duncan, John Ashbrook and the man most known by his internet personality ' Comfortably Smug,' struck a business and editorial licensing deal with Fox News, Axios reported.
Did you know that Lara Trump, co-chair of the Republican National Committee and daughter-in-law of the president, has a musical streak? She released a new song today, The Telegraph's Rob Crilly scooped, called Eyes of God.
Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) opened our conversion at the Hill Nation last week summit with a zinger. I asked how post-congressional life was treating him. McCarthy said, 'Fabulous. We don't have Matt Gaetz anymore.' The former congressman and McCarthy antagonist responded on X: 'This is so sad, Kevin. Get help. Move on. You don't have to always be thinking about me.'
WHAT I'M READING
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bondi facing Democratic calls to testify following report she told Trump she was in Epstein files
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Pam Bondi is facing Democratic calls to testify before Congress following a newspaper's revelation that she told President Donald Trump that his name appeared in the files of the Jeffrey Epstein sex-trafficking investigation. The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that Bondi told Trump his name was among many high-profile figures mentioned in the files, which the Justice Department this month said it would not be releasing despite a clamor from online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and members of Trump's base. Trump's personal ties to Epstein are well-established and his name is already known to have been included in records related to the wealthy financier, who killed himself in jail in 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. Sen. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, responded to the report by calling on Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee. 'We need to bring Bondi and Patel into the Judiciary Committee to testify about this now,' Schiff said in a video posted on X. The Justice Department declined to comment on the report but issued a joint statement from Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche saying that investigators had reviewed the records and 'nothing in the files warranted further investigation or prosecution.' 'As par of our routine briefing, we made the president aware of the findings,' the statement said. The mere inclusion of a person's name in Epstein's files does not imply wrongdoing and he was known to have been associated with multiple prominent figures, including Trump. Over the years, thousands of pages of records have been released through lawsuits, Epstein's criminal dockets, public disclosures and Freedom of Information Act requests. They include a 2016 deposition in which an accuser recounted she spent several hours with Epstein at Trump's Atlantic City casino but didn't say if she met Trump and did not accuse him of any wrongdoing. Trump has also said he once thought Epstein was a 'terrific guy' but they later had a falling-out. White House spokesman Steven Cheung on Wednesday said the reports were 'nothing more than a continuation of the fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media.'

3 minutes ago
Justice Department faces subpoena over Epstein files by House Oversight Committee
A House Oversight subcommittee voted Wednesday to subpoena the Department of Justice to release the Jeffrey Epstein files. The motion passed by a vote of 8-2. Notably, three GOP lawmakers -- Reps. Nancy Mace, Scott Perry and Brian Jack -- joined with Democrats on the subcommittee to approve the subpoena, defying Republican leadership. The House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer must sign the subpoena before it can be officially issued, per committee rules. Comer plans to sign off on the subpoena, a Republican committee source told ABC News. The top Democrat on the subcommittee, Rep. Summer Lee, initially offered the motion. Audrey Strauss, acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, points to a photo of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, during a news conference in New York on July 2, Minchillo/AP, FILE Republicans on the committee pushed back and amended the subpoena to also include communications by Biden administration officials and the DOJ. These officials include Bill and Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland, Robert Mueller, William Barr, Jeff Sessions and Alberto Gonzales. Oversight Ranking Member Rep. Robert Garcia said in a statement that the subcommittee's vote on Wednesday "was just the first step toward accountability, and we will continue pushing for the truth." "Today, Oversight Democrats fought for transparency and accountability on the Epstein files and won. House Republicans didn't make it easy, but the motion was finally passed to force the Department of Justice to release the Epstein files," Garcia said. The news comes the same day House Oversight Committee Chairman Comer on Wednesday issued a subpoena to Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein, for a deposition to occur at Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee on Aug. 11. "The facts and circumstances surrounding both your and Mr. Epstein's cases have received immense public interest and scrutiny," Comer wrote in a statement Wednesday. Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking and other charges and sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2022. "What we're talking about here is someone who's in federal prison on appeal, so our attorneys will have to communicate with her attorneys to see if there are terms, if she wants," Comer said before the subpoena was issued. "If there are no terms, we'll roll in there quick." The situation will be similar to Comer's effort to interview Jason Galanis, a former business partner of Hunter Biden and Devon Archer, during the GOP's impeachment inquiry of then-President Joe Biden. "I did that with [Jason] Galanis, and the Democrats were real offended that we would want to interview anyone in prison. But now you know they're, they're all they want to interview someone in prison," Comer said. The committee has shown a propensity to record video of the interviews and release content afterwards -- as it did with several former Biden officials who invoked their 5th Amendment rights earlier this summer -- so it's possible there could be handout video from the deposition. Separately, Attorney General Pam Bondi said Monday that Deputy Attorney Todd Blanche will meet with Maxwell sometime in the "coming days." President Donald Trump last week said on his social media platform that he had ordered the Justice Department to "release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval." Comer has also signaled that the circumstances of a closed-door deposition at a federal prison could attract both Democrats and Republicans to attend the interview. "There will be so many members of Congress that'll want to be in that prison," Comer said. "I would assume that there'll be a lot of members of the Oversight Committee on both -- in both parties that'll want to be there." Ghislaine Maxwell attends VIP Evening of Conversation for Women's Brain Health Initiative, Moderated by Tina Brown at Spring Studios on October 18, 2016 in New York Gaboury/Paul Bruinooge/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images A congressional subpoena is a formal legal order issued by a congressional committee or individual compelling their testimony. David Oscar Markus, appellate counsel for Maxwell, said in a statement to ABC News that Maxwell "looks forward" to meeting with Blanche and that meeting will inform how she proceeds with the subpoena. "As for the congressional subpoena, Ms. Maxwell is taking this one step at a time. She looks forward to her meeting with the Department of Justice, and that discussion will help inform how she proceeds," he said. Markus also responded to comments from House Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Wednesday questioning Maxwell's credibility as a witness. "If they see fit to bring in Ghislaine Maxwell for testimony, that's fine. I will note the obvious concern, the caveat that Chairman Comer and I and everyone has that could she be counted on to tell the truth? Is she a credible witness?" Johnson said to reporters. "We understand Speaker Johnson's general concern -- Congress should always vet the credibility of its witnesses. But in this case, those concerns are unfounded. If Ms. Maxwell agrees to testify before Congress and not take the 5th -- and that remains a big if -- she would testify truthfully, as she always has said she would and as she will with Mr. Blanche. The truth should not be feared or preemptively dismissed," Markus said in a statement.


Los Angeles Times
4 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump ordered purge of ‘unpatriotic' signage from national parks. How one California spot complied
Four years ago, National Park Service employees seeking to provide a more robust look at the history of Muir Woods National Monument in Marin County began the 'History Under Construction' exhibit. The concept of the work was to expand an existing sign featuring a timeline detailing the preservation of Muir Woods. Employees placed caution tape on the sign within Founder's Grove and used yellow sticky notes to add facts and dates that were missing from the original timeline. Among the information added were the efforts of Indigenous people who originally maintained the land, as well as the role of women in creating the national monument. A letter on the plaque assured passersby that 'everything on this sign is accurate, but incomplete. The facts are not under construction, but the way we tell history is.' But, as of this month, the yellow notes are no more. The expanded exhibit became the first in the nation to be altered following an executive order by President Trump in March to rid park signage of any language he would deem unpatriotic. The president's aim was to restore federal sites that he said had been changed since 2020 to perpetuate a 'false reconstruction of American history' including 'improper partisan ideology.' The Muir Woods change was first reported by SF Gate. Elizabeth Villano, a former park ranger who helped create the new version of the sign, criticized the move, writing in a post on Medium that the Trump administration 'is actively censoring American history from the public.' She said the goal of the project was to make sure nothing on the original sign was erased, but to add details so people could see the difference in how history was told and how it could be expanded to include more voices. 'We wanted to tell the true story of the woods in a way that helped people learn from the past, and apply those lessons towards a brighter future,' she wrote. 'Despite this care not to erase history, here I am, watching history be erased.' A spokesperson for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, which includes Muir Woods, could not immediately be reached for comment on Wednesday. Before the notes were added in 2021, the first date included in the sign's timeline, called 'Path to Preservation,' was the establishment of the first national park in the United States, Yellowstone, in 1872. The next was 1892 when the Sierra Club was founded in San Francisco with John Muir as the first president. But staff at the time found that some key information was missing from the timeline, namely the work of the Coast Miwok and Southern Pomo people who tended to the land before Europeans arrived in North America. They also included the first campaign to save the region launched by a women's club in 1904. Of course, not all the information added to the timeline was positive. Staff detailed Spanish missionaries exploiting the work of Indigenous people in the Bay Area to build California missions and congressional actions stripping Coast Miwok people of title to their ancestral lands, including Muir Woods. The revised timeline didn't shy away from pointing out the complex legacies of key figures who helped spearhead the creation of the national monument. It noted that John Muir referred to Indigenous people using racist language in his diary, which was published years before his death, and pointed out William Kent's vote in Congress to prevent non-citizens from owning or leasing land. The rangers didn't cast blame for the omissions, saying that the expanded narratives were reflective of increasing diversity among park service employees in the years since the timeline was first unveiled. 'From redwood conservation to the legacy of the country's founders, American stories are enriched by complexity, dimension, and challenge. It's not our job to judge these stories or promote a singular narrative. As national park rangers, it is our mandate to tell complete stories that reflect who we are as a society. And as Americans, it's important that we hear them,' according to a National Park Service post about the changes. Trump's executive order directed the Department of the Interior to identify any public monuments, memorials, statues or markers that had been removed or changed since 2020 to 'perpetuate a false reconstruction of American history,' minimize the value of historical events or figures or include 'improper partisan ideology' and to reinstate prior monuments. The order also directed officials to ensure that monuments do not contain content that disparages Americans. Instead, the monuments should focus on 'the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people or, with respect to natural features, the beauty, abundance, and grandeur of the American landscape,' the order states. Critics have said Trump's directive demands a rose-colored view of more complex events that make up American history. Villano, the former park ranger, wrote in the Medium essay that it's disparaging to Americans to take away people's ability to think critically and have a better understanding of history. 'Why doesn't the White House want you to see a more complete version of history? Maybe it's because, when we see ourselves in history, we realize that we can reshape it,' she wrote. 'For a government like this, that must feel like a threat. It doesn't benefit people in power to understand that anyone can be a part of history.'